A Mach–Zehnder Fabry–Perot Hybrid Fibre-Optic Interferometer for a Large Measurement Range Based on the Kalman Filter

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

Ref.comments to the paper titled as “Elimination of Parasitic Effect in Mach-Zehnder Fabry-Perot Hybrid Fiber-Optic Sinusoidal Phase-Modulating Interferometer Based on Kalman Filter” written by the authors: Yixuan Wang, Peigang Yang and Tao Jin

 

It is known that working with the optical devices requires special care and attention. Naturally, for a number of the reasons, it is necessary to eliminate various inaccuracies in the work, for example, associated with a violation of the alignment, detection of the influence of the moisture on a number of the elements used in optical devices, etc. The Mach-Zehnder interferometer is not without these problems. From this point of view, the current paper is modern and actual.

For the first, this paper is included the analysis of 23 literature data. Indeed, the authors are known the problem and can make some steps to resolve the important tasks. But it is not enough for this perspective area of the study. Please add in your analysis at list 5-7 papers written by last 3-5 years. You can show how different approaches can be used to resolve the following problems.

Well. The paper is good illustrated; the figures permit to understand the mail reason of the research. The equations used are not in contradiction with our basic physical knowledge. The logic of reasoning and discussion in this article is not violated.

 

The questions are: How did you maximize/minimize the phase delay disorder in the interaction of two coherent beams in this interferometer? How does your method, in comparison with others, improve the correctness of determining the phase delay disorder? Please make the comparative table with the estimation of the phase delay disorder by your and other scientific team’s approaches.

 

Conclusion part is so short; it should be extended. It is not included the basic results presented in the current paper. Please add the data about the main advantage of your method.

As for my local opinion, the paper can be published after major corrections.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Editor,

 

Thanks very much for taking your time to review this manuscript.

 

We consider the reviewer' comments seriously and thank the valuable suggestions on our manuscript. We have carefully revised our manuscript (Title: A Mach-Zehnder Fabry-Perot Hybrid Fiber-Optic Sinusoidal Phase-Modulating Interferometer to Eliminate of Parasitic Effect Based on Kalman Filter; optics-2947192) based on the constructive comments of the reviewers. We have detailed our point-by-point responses to comments and listed the revisions in the response letter.

 

Queries/critiques are numbered and in blue Times Roman font. Responses follow in black Arial font. Revised prose from within the manuscript is in red Arial font. Yellow underlining indicates revised manuscript spacing.

 

We look forward to hearing from you soon.

 

Sincerely,

Tao Jin

School of Optical-Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai 200093, China

E-mail:[email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article submitted for review "Elimination of parasitic effect in Mach-Zehnder Fabry-Perot hybrid fiber-optic sinusoidal phase-modulating interferometer based on Kalman filter" brings innovative elements in the field. The authors have performed a powerful experimental setup demonstrating the benefits of inserting a Kalman filter implemented by FPGA technology into the data processing. The paper is well written and carefully edited, unfortunately not in the graphical area where the figures do not respect the MDPI template and for this reason some updates are recommended in a revised form of the paper. 

1. Figure 3 - I recommend the format with the subfigure indication outside the graphic according to the template. The figures will have neater and more professional graphics. It is recommended for all figures with experimental data to have grid for better orientation of readers.

2. Ditto for Figure 4, and 5.

3. Figure 6 does not have subfigures defined.

Once these small shortcomings are corrected in my opinion the paper can be published in this form.  

Author Response

Dear Editor,

 

Thanks very much for taking your time to review this manuscript.

 

We consider the reviewer' comments seriously and thank the valuable suggestions on our manuscript. We have carefully revised our manuscript (Title: A Mach-Zehnder Fabry-Perot Hybrid Fiber-Optic Sinusoidal Phase-Modulating Interferometer to Eliminate of Parasitic Effect Based on Kalman Filter; optics-2947192) based on the constructive comments of the reviewers. We have detailed our point-by-point responses to comments and listed the revisions in the response letter.

 

Queries/critiques are numbered and in blue Times Roman font. Responses follow in black Arial font. Revised prose from within the manuscript is in red Arial font. Yellow underlining indicates revised manuscript spacing.

 

We look forward to hearing from you soon.

 

Sincerely,

Tao Jin

School of Optical-Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai 200093, China

E-mail:[email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript “Elimination of Parasitic Effect in Mach-Zehnder Fabry-Perot Hybrid Fiber-Optic Sinusoidal Phase-Modulating Interferometer Based on Kalman Filter” by Y. Wang at al. deals with optimization of the accuracy of a fiber interferometer.

This topic is interesting for publication in Optics.

However, several aspects of the manuscript need improvements.

1. Title: The title is very similar to Ref. 21. To distinguish this research from Ref. 21, the title should be more unique.

2. Introduction: “Laser measurement is a popular measurement technique…” The first sentences have to be improved. They sound not very scientific. Instead of “Laser measurement” Laser interferometry could be used.

3. In the manuscript spacing between references, new sentences etc are missing (e.g. l.25, l.51, l.119 and many more).

4. Introduction: To give a better overview over the different approaches and reached measurement accuracy the achieved values of Ref.15 to Ref.21 should be shown in a table. In the results section, measurement results of this paper should be compared. The authors should clarify the novelty of their approach not only in terms of a different applied technique, but also as an improvement compared to other techniques. They should also present an application that benefits from their approach.

5. Section 2: Sentences between the equations should be improved. E.g. “Estimate….” l.162

6. Figure 2: It is too large for the presented content.

7. Section 3: “In this paper” should be only used in the introduction. Use instead “Here, …”.

8. F-P cavity: The author should state in line 45 that F-P stand for Fabry-Perot. Also PGC in line 203 is not explained.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English language is overall fine. The authors should carefully check the manuscript for missing spacings between references and between sentences.

Author Response

Dear Editor,

 

Thanks very much for taking your time to review this manuscript.

 

We consider the reviewer' comments seriously and thank the valuable suggestions on our manuscript. We have carefully revised our manuscript (Title: A Mach-Zehnder Fabry-Perot Hybrid Fiber-Optic Sinusoidal Phase-Modulating Interferometer to Eliminate of Parasitic Effect Based on Kalman Filter; optics-2947192) based on the constructive comments of the reviewers. We have detailed our point-by-point responses to comments and listed the revisions in the response letter.

 

Queries/critiques are numbered and in blue Times Roman font. Responses follow in black Arial font. Revised prose from within the manuscript is in red Arial font. Yellow underlining indicates revised manuscript spacing.

 

We look forward to hearing from you soon.

 

Sincerely,

Tao Jin

School of Optical-Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai 200093, China

E-mail:[email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have improved the manuscript and gave detailed answers to all my comments.

However, the modified manuscript should be carefully checked again.

E.g. l.203: It should be Eq. (5) and Eq. (6), l.344: 5 mm to 45 mm, table 2: Kalman

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Overall, the language is fine. There are some mistakes in the modified text.

Author Response

Dear Editor,

 

Thanks very much for taking your time to review this manuscript.

 

We consider the reviewer' comments seriously and thank the valuable suggestions on our manuscript. We have carefully revised our manuscript (Title: A Mach-Zehnder Fabry-Perot Hybrid Fiber-Optic Sinusoidal Phase-Modulating Interferometer to Eliminate of Parasitic Effect Based on Kalman Filter; optics-2947192) based on the constructive comments of the reviewers. We have detailed our point-by-point responses to comments and listed the revisions in the response letter.

 

Queries/critiques are numbered and in blue Times Roman font. Responses follow in black Arial font. Revised prose from within the manuscript is in red Arial font. 

 

We look forward to hearing from you soon.

 

Sincerely,

Tao Jin

School of Optical-Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai 200093, China

E-mail:[email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf